york times has done two pieces, and it was serialized in the new york times magazine, given front coverage in a book review in january, and it's been in other papers as well. the subject of editorials all over the country--is that reagan critics are interested in the evidence and that there's a way in which, in this information age, real evidence still matters. had he done this on a computer, it wouldn't have worked. we wouldn't have been able to--to do this book with the--the kind of authenticity that we've been able to do it. but i think the fact that we've produced reagan in his own hand, with his own drafts, not trying to protect him in any way, clean up the material--some people said, 'don't present drafts. you'll see the spelling errors and you--his strikeouts, things he didn't intend to--to put on the air. you shouldn't do that--his notes in the margins.' the fact that we did that, i think, has brought a lot of reagan critics into saying, 'no, we don't agree with his views on all of these issues, but the fact that he was working through them, that he was reading sources widely and t